CIPS L4M5 Exam With Confidence Using Practice Dumps

LO 2, AC 2.1

Buying organisation may increase its leverage with suppliers by concentrating spend. Supplier spend consolidation can take many forms as outlined below:

- Vendor base reduction: straightforward reduction of number of suppliers in any category

- Volume pooling: pooling cross organisational requirement until your order volume is high enough to attract new bidders/additional discounts

- Volume redistribution: making recommendations following spend analysis to move from one supplier to another

- Volume consolidation across categories: certain purchase requirements may be common across a number of categories. In the scenario, XYZ has combined different categories but closely related to office services into a larger contract so that they can increase their leverage.

- Standardisation and harmonisation of specifications: analysis of specifications and standards for a high spend purchased input, may show that there is a little difference between them and that the specification can be standardised or at least harmonised across the group or across national, regional or global operations.

- Forming purchasing consortia: buyers may decide to come together and combine their purchase volumes to attract better deals.

LO 1, AC 1.3

Competing is assertive and uncooperative, a power-oriented mode. When competing, an individual pursues his or her own concerns at the other person’s expense, using whatever power seems appropriate to win his or her position. Competing might mean standing up for your rights, defending a position you believe is correct, or simply trying to win. Competing will not allow long-term relationship to flourish.

Compromising is intermediate in both assertiveness and cooperativeness. When compromising, the objective is to find an expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties. Compromising falls on a middle ground between competing and accommodating, giving up more than competing but less than accommodating. Likewise, it addresses an issue more directly than avoiding but doesn’t explore it in as much depth as collaborating. Compromising might mean splitting the difference, exchanging concessions, or seeking a quick middle-ground position. It is a valid approach when long-term relationships are at stake and it is important to find some common ground on which to base an agreement. Both sides get something but not everything. Therefore, this is the most appropriate for this scenario.

Avoiding is unassertive and uncooperative. When avoiding, an individual does not immediately pursue his or her own concerns or those of the other person. He or she does not address the conflict. Avoiding might take the form of diplomatically sidestepping an issue, postponing an issue until a better time, or simply withdrawing from a threatening situation. In the scenario, both parties want to take the opportunity, then avoiding is not an appropriate solution.

Accommodating is unassertive and cooperative—the opposite of competing. When accommodating, an individual neglects his or her own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other person; there is an element of self-sacrifice in this mode. Accommodating might take theform of selfless generosity or charity, obeying another person’s order when you would prefer not to, or yielding to another’s point of view. In the scenario, neither party shall concede all of their requirements, it is unnecessary to adopt this approach.

LO 1, AC 1.1